New Friedman IR-X preamp

[mk5]

Ok, I understood about 35% of what the heck y’all are talking about, but thank you. This generally is the reason I gave up on the Egnater Mod Stuff even though it was so great—I think he and Friedman have a common signature trait of rolling off the highs; for lack of a better phrase, missing the bite. The tapered high end seems to be a recurring criticism of the Friedman BE line; either you like it or you don’t.

I didn’t hear that as much in the IR-D either. Would love a comparison. I did not like the demos of the X or J at all. X for the missing high end and generic tone (my ears) and what I perceive as a too-thinned-out, modded X as the IR-J.

 

[Shredder777]

And if you're curious, same settings on the output with the IR bypassed vs not. Of course adding an IR rolls off the high end further.

Now all that to say, it's not necessarily wrong that the high frequency is rolled off. It's possible that's what the amp is supposed to do with its tone stack. But it is odd that there's a switchable cut in the preamp, apparently.

I have a suspicion there may be a bug, but maybe that was there all along? Again would need to roll back the firmware to check.

I agree. I am assuming that Fractal wouldn't have let their model out the door if it didn't match the original preamp, so that suggests that the extreme cut is something unique to the pedal.

It also hints at why they are using digital conversion before the send; because they are using digital filters to complete the sound of the preamp. If the preamp was a 100% legit be100 preamp, it would have the same eq curve as the fractal.

What is probably going on is that they have a generic preamp design and are using digital control and filters to get them to sound the way they want. That is why the IRJ has that nasally mid hump and the IRX has the chopped top. Probably all from digital filters applied after the preamp.

 

[Jarick]

I agree. I am assuming that Fractal wouldn't have let their model out the door if it didn't match the original preamp, so that suggests that the extreme cut is something unique to the pedal.

It also hints at why they are using digital conversion before the send; because they are using digital filters to complete the sound of the preamp. If the preamp was a 100% legit be100 preamp, it would have the same eq curve as the fractal.

What is probably going on is that they have a generic preamp design and are using digital control and filters to get them to sound the way they want. That is why the IRJ has that nasally mid hump and the IRX has the chopped top. Probably all from digital filters applied after the preamp.

I'd have to go back through the marketing materials, but I get the sense this truly was designed as a standalone direct pedal and not necessarily something designed to be a preamp replacement. So I wouldn't fault them if they did some additional processing that wouldn't be in say a Synergy BE module.

Assuming Dave was involved in the design and testing, they probably used their ears. Maybe they found that an aggressive high cut was more pleasing when running direct. Or maybe this wasn't in the original design, was added in the firmware, but they hadn't fully tested to ensure it doesn't apply on direct outs. I would have thought it was in the power amp section alongside the presence and thump controls so the send doesn't include it.

I haven't used the IR-X much since the update anyways...I did like to run the pedal in the loop of my Axe FX 3 quite a bit. I didn't notice that it was overly dark either. I would tend to run the clean channel on the lower bright setting which was plenty bright to me, and the gain channel with the tight switch on and with treble/bass up and mids back.

 

[Shredder777]

I'd have to go back through the marketing materials, but I get the sense this truly was designed as a standalone direct pedal and not necessarily something designed to be a preamp replacement. So I wouldn't fault them if they did some additional processing that wouldn't be in say a Synergy BE module.

Assuming Dave was involved in the design and testing, they probably used their ears. Maybe they found that an aggressive high cut was more pleasing when running direct. Or maybe this wasn't in the original design, was added in the firmware, but they hadn't fully tested to ensure it doesn't apply on direct outs. I would have thought it was in the power amp section alongside the presence and thump controls so the send doesn't include it.

I haven't used the IR-X much since the update anyways...I did like to run the pedal in the loop of my Axe FX 3 quite a bit. I didn't notice that it was overly dark either. I would tend to run the clean channel on the lower bright setting which was plenty bright to me, and the gain channel with the tight switch on and with treble/bass up and mids back.

The manual does say it can be used direct to an amp's return using the send.

I probably have spent hundreds/thousands of hours tweaking parametric and shelving eq over the past two decades to get the tone I want. And when I did my runs up the neck I could hear the harmonics were missing. It's only the top octave that is affected, so for the most part it sounds good. It is a good sounding pedal for rhythm playing, but it definitely sounds like someone had been monkeying with an eq on the output.

My guess is that the majority of the digital tone shaping happens pre send. I mean obviously screws up the pedal to be used as a real BE100 preamp into an amp. Why would they do it like this? Because the preamp is a cheap chinese mass produced thing and using digital eq after the pre lets them decide what it is going to sound like. They probably used the same preamp for all of the pedals and used digital eq and control to give them their signature. The IRJ is more open, but it has a nasally mid which is just a PEQ bump. The IRX has a shelving eq on the top.

I had this idea last night to develop an IR that puts the natural slope of the curve back in to restore the harmonics, but this would only work for the DI output. I could never just plug this into an amps return and be happy with the sound. And as far as keeping it for the "power amp sim", I suspect that is just an IR player with a little bit of eq adjustment. A dedicated IR player does this better.

 

[KingsXJJ]

The differences between the IRX boost and IRJ lead me to believe these are not generic preamps in totality but I bet the tube circuits are similar or identical. I wonder what Dave would say about all of this…

 

[Shredder777]

The differences between the IRX boost and IRJ lead me to believe these are not generic preamps in totality but I bet the tube circuits are similar or identical. I wonder what Dave would say about all of this…

Right, they aren't identical. I think the tube part is probably identical. My point was that these are cheap smds, designing a digital stage after the preamp to impart a different character lets them easily package different versions. They can actually tune or change the sound after it is released if they need to.

 

[Jarick]

My understanding is the preamp is analog primarily. I would be shocked if there’s much digital modeling happening outside the IR and power amp.

 

[laxu]

I mean most Friedman amps are variations of a Plexi or JCM800 circuit with various mods. So it's no wonder that many of them have a huge ton of overlap and it's more like "pick a flavor you like" thing.

I think one of you owners would be best off just shooting Friedman an email and asking what's going on that it's so much darker.

For the record the real Friedman BE amp doesn't have the kind of sizzle and bite that many Marshalls do.

 

[Shredder777]

I mean most Friedman amps are variations of a Plexi or JCM800 circuit with various mods. So it's no wonder that many of them have a huge ton of overlap and it's more like "pick a flavor you like" thing.

I think one of you owners would be best off just shooting Friedman an email and asking what's going on that it's so much darker.

For the record the real Friedman BE amp doesn't have the kind of sizzle and bite that many Marshalls do.

According to Jarick's frequency response tests, and my ears, the IR-X doesn't sound the same as a real be100 preamp. Based on the curves shown, there is no chance of it.

The preamp also seems to be affected by the low pass filter. Whether this is a bug or by design, unknown. But I am pretty sure it is in the digital domain. Which suggests that the sound of the preamp is run through digital eq to get its sound. That IRJ mid spike is probably just a digital PEQ spike, I've never heard a real amp like that either.

I believe the pedal was designed to be like a hyper idealized/recorded BE100, which itself is like an idealized Marshall. They just chopped off the high frequency content and called it a day.

 

[JiveTurkey]

 

[Jarick]

According to Jarick's frequency response tests, and my ears, the IR-X doesn't sound the same as a real be100 preamp. Based on the curves shown, there is no chance of it.

The preamp also seems to be affected by the low pass filter. Whether this is a bug or by design, unknown. But I am pretty sure it is in the digital domain. Which suggests that the sound of the preamp is run through digital eq to get its sound. That IRJ mid spike is probably just a digital PEQ spike, I've never heard a real amp like that either.

I believe the pedal was designed to be like a hyper idealized/recorded BE100, which itself is like an idealized Marshall. They just chopped off the high frequency content and called it a day.

To be clear I didn't measure a BE-100 preamp Also the modelers had power amp modeling as well, but I doubt that would change the high end slopes (or at least wouldn't make them brighter).

I'll email Friedman and let you know what I hear back if anything. Last time I emailed was asking if there were Midi CC codes for the IR-X and I didn't get any response, but several months later they did add them which was cool.

 

[Jarick]

Alright, Dave e-mailed back and said there wasn't a low pass previously, but they added because people complained it was too bright. I'm not going to pester him anymore but sounds like it's something they could change again with another firmware update.

 

[KingsXJJ]

After messing with the IRX for hours (well a dang long time for my ADD butt) to get it tuned up via control panel and app, I made some headway but still wasn’t completely satisfied. I grabbed one of my Ampli-Firebox MkII’s and loaded a HBE patch and bam. There was what I was missing. I know a lot of folks have issues with the brand but that little box just smokes. Makes wonder if I should even try the IR-J or
IR-D looking for my sweet spot on these.

 

[KingsXJJ]

Alright, Dave e-mailed back and said there wasn't a low pass previously, but they added because people complained it was too bright. I'm not going to pester him anymore but sounds like it's something they could change again with another firmware update.

Just add a fourth position that disables it or revamp it to be continuously variable with “off” on one side.

Done.

 

[Shredder777]

After messing with the IRX for hours (well a dang long time for my ADD butt) to get it tuned up via control panel and app, I made some headway but still wasn’t completely satisfied. I grabbed one of my Ampli-Firebox MkII’s and loaded a HBE patch and bam. There was what I was missing. I know a lot of folks have issues with the brand but that little box just smokes. Makes wonder if I should even try the IR-J or
IR-D looking for my sweet spot on these.

I've heard nothing but good things about those.

 

[Los-D]

After messing with the IRX for hours (well a dang long time for my ADD butt) to get it tuned up via control panel and app, I made some headway but still wasn’t completely satisfied. I grabbed one of my Ampli-Firebox MkII’s and loaded a HBE patch and bam. There was what I was missing. I know a lot of folks have issues with the brand but that little box just smokes. Makes wonder if I should even try the IR-J or
IR-D looking for my sweet spot on these.

Yeah, the AFB with a Line 6 M9 was all I needed for a brief time. Kinda makes you think how much GAS gets in the way at times.

 

[KingsXJJ]

All right. Here we go. After giving this some thought, all low pass intrigue aside… I think I may go for an IR-J. While the guitarist kid in me might want to think I am hip with all the latest high gain tones… maybe I’m not. I am more a product of the 80’s and 90’s. Plexis and 800’s hot-rodded are what turn me on if done right. I might take a bit to allow some gear to sell and then jump jump on the butt ugly red samurai
IR-J. We’ll see how that goes…

 

[Shredder777]

I did some experimenting with EQ and it totally fixes the IR-X. I used a graphic eq and tried a smooth to drastic increase from 5K to 20K to try to counteract the chopped top shown in Jarick's curve. It became alive and playable. It still has a smooth top, you can just hear all the articulations now. Nothing strange happened with the noise floor, it is still a smooth and natural sounding amp, its just you can hear it now, and harmonics everywhere are very tube like and alive.

What interesting to me is that the EQ becomes more functional this way. If you want it to be dark and sit back in the mix, all you have to do is lower the treble/mids and it ducks out. But if you raise them up it becomes articulate and up front. This is 100% tube amp tone.

Most of the tone adjustment comes from the boost pedal you are using. The 3band eq is broad and is more for presentation, not tone shaping.

I am 80% keeping this now. Still need to figure out if/how I can get the fixed sound direct to my amp without having to run a shaping IR after it.

 

[KingsXJJ]

I did some experimenting with EQ and it totally fixes the IR-X. I used a graphic eq and tried a smooth to drastic increase from 5K to 20K to try to counteract the chopped top shown in Jarick's curve. It became alive and playable. It still has a smooth top, you can just hear all the articulations now. Nothing strange happened with the noise floor, it is still a smooth and natural sounding amp, its just you can hear it now, and harmonics everywhere are very tube like and alive.

What interesting to me is that the EQ becomes more functional this way. If you want it to be dark and sit back in the mix, all you have to do is lower the treble/mids and it ducks out. But if you raise them up it becomes articulate and up front. This is 100% tube amp tone.

Most of the tone adjustment comes from the boost pedal you are using. The 3band eq is broad and is more for presentation, not tone shaping.

I am 80% keeping this now. Still need to figure out if/how I can get the fixed sound direct to my amp without having to run a shaping IR after it.

I’m not going to add squat as far as EQ to get the IR-X to sound right. That’s what Dave and Synergy are for. If you have some complainers about brightness accommodate them with a low-pass software patch… don’t F others in the process. Allow others to hear and dial in what was first created. Make it adjustable zero cut to wherever other ears like. I’m out. I’ll check out an IR-J when I can afford it after selling the IR-X at a loss. So disappointing.

 

[Shredder777]

I’m not going to add squat as far as EQ to get the IR-X to sound right. That’s what Dave and Synergy are for. If you have some complainers about brightness accommodate them with a low-pass software patch… don’t F others in the process. Allow others to hear and dial in what was first created. Make it adjustable zero cut to wherever other ears like. I’m out. I’ll check out an IR-J when I can afford it after selling the IR-X at a loss. So disappointing.

I agree with you. I wouldn't try the IRJ either.

But don't let my opinion on it affect you. If you like the way it sounds then just enjoy it.

It is what it is.